On Friday 13 May 2005 04:04, Hugh Fisher wrote: > On 05/13/2005 03:36:07 AM, Timothy Miller wrote: > > [ munch ] > > > You, as a consumer, want what is best for the community. What would > > be the best thing to do here? Consider, just for a moment, the idea > > that making the RTL available under an open source license (right > > away) may not be the best thing for the community in the long term. > > I want a 3D graphics card with OK performance which anyone can > write a device driver for. I really, really, don't care about > whether or not the RTL/Verilog/hardware design would be "free" > according to the FSF. > > At the recent LinuxConf in Australia Wayne Piekarski, augmented > VR guru, said that he uses nVidia because they work, and that's > the criteria that matters to a 3D developer. I don't recall > Keith Packard complaining about "closed hardware" graphic cards > either when he was talking about the future of X Windows. > > When one of these "release the RTL" zealots starts emailing > from a box that runs on a free CPU design rather than something > by Intel/AMD/IBM, maybe I'll pay some attention to them.
I haven't really been so active in here because I had other things to do, plus there hasn't been much actual visible development going on (Timothy: If you believe there's something really useful that can be done on the software side at this time, shout). So let me just say that I fully agree with what Hugh has said. I want a graphics card with okay performance that can be programmed without having to make wild guesses about obscure magic values, nothing more, nothing less. cu, Nicolai > Hugh Fisher > DCS, ANU
pgpoUQ02ItCK7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
